New Ecological Paradigm Scale
Also known as: NEP, New Environmental Paradigm Scale
The New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) Scale measures endorsement of an ecocentric worldview that views humans as embedded within, rather than dominant over, nature. Developed by Dunlap et al. (2000) to update the original 1978 scale, the NEP assesses environmental beliefs across multiple dimensions including balance of nature, limits to growth, human exceptionalism, and nature's intrinsic value. It is widely used in environmental psychology, sustainability research, and conservation communication studies.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
Use the NEP Scale when assessing global environmental worldviews in comparative research, tracking shifts in environmental consciousness over time, evaluating outcomes of environmental education interventions, segmenting populations for conservation communication, and understanding individual differences in ecological orientation. Particularly valuable in cross-cultural studies, as it has been translated and validated in multiple languages. Suitable for both research and applied contexts (e.g., screening for audience segments in sustainability campaigns).
Strengths & limitations
- Well-established psychometric properties with strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α typically 0.80–0.86) and temporal stability
- Widely translated and validated across cultures, enabling meaningful cross-national environmental attitude comparisons
- Comprehensive coverage of multiple environmental belief dimensions (limits, balance, human exceptionalism) rather than single-issue focus
- Strong predictive validity for pro-environmental behavior, conservation support, and political attitudes toward environmental regulation
- Frequently used in meta-analyses and longitudinal studies, providing extensive normative data for interpretation
- Measures stated beliefs about nature, not actual environmental behavior—NEP scores correlate only moderately with real-world conservation actions
- Potential response bias toward socially desirable answers; respondents may endorse pro-environmental items due to perceived social approval rather than genuine conviction
- Item wording and cultural context significantly affect responses; some items contain dense ecological concepts that may be misunderstood by respondents with limited environmental science education
- Limited dimensional specificity—the 15-item format combines multiple constructs (limits, balance, exceptionalism), making it difficult to isolate which specific belief shift most influences behavior
Frequently asked
Which items are reverse-coded?
Reverse-coded items typically include: 'We are approaching the limit of the number of people Earth can support' (reverse: disagreement = low NEP), 'Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs' (reverse: agreement = low NEP), and others emphasizing human dominance or infinite growth. Always consult your source scale to verify exact reverse items, as published versions may vary slightly.
What is the difference between the original (1978) and revised (2000) NEP scales?
The 2000 revision updated language for contemporary relevance, added three new items addressing genetic engineering and human modification of nature, and improved factorial structure. The original 1978 scale had 12 items and used dated phrasing. Use the 2000 version in new research unless historical comparison requires the original version.
Can NEP scores be used to predict specific environmental behaviors like recycling or water conservation?
NEP correlates with general pro-environmental intentions and policy support (r = 0.40–0.55), but prediction of specific behaviors is weaker and highly context-dependent. Combine NEP with behavioral intention scales and situational factors (convenience, cost, social norms) for stronger behavior prediction.
Are there cultural differences in NEP scoring and interpretation?
Yes. Industrialized nations and Western populations typically score 45–55; rural and indigenous populations, and those with strong traditional ecological knowledge, often score higher (55–65). Environmental scientists across cultures score 60+. When comparing groups cross-culturally, use validated translations and test measurement invariance; report group-specific norms alongside universal cutoffs.
Sources
- Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP). Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425–442. DOI: 10.1111/0022-4537.00176 ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). New Ecological Paradigm Scale. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/environmental-psychology/new-ecological-paradigm
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- CCASEnvironmental Psychology↔ compare
- CNSEnvironmental Psychology↔ compare
- EISEnvironmental Psychology↔ compare